March 07, 2012

Direct threat with regards to employment discrimination

In a suit filed in the Western District of Texas, a dwarf is claiming that her employer, Starbucks, violated the American Disabilities Act (ADA.) Employee, Elsa Sallard suggests that the company’s failure to provide a stool or small ladder violated the employer’s duty to reasonably accommodate her disability. Under the ADA, an employer must reasonably accommodate individuals with disabilities unless that accommodation would create an undue burden on the employer.

In response to this suit, Starbucks is claiming that Ms. Sallard was a direct threat to patrons and co-workers. According to statute, to claim direct threat, the employer must consider the circumstances on a case by case basis. Factors that the employer must consider include “the nature, duration, and severity of the risk; the probability that the potential injury will actually occur; and whether reasonable modifications of policies, practices, or procedures or the provision of auxiliary aids or services will mitigate the risk.”

Note: The news reports have not yet discussed in depth why Starbucks is claiming direct threat. This is what we've found: “Though no specifics are given, Starbucks is claiming that allowing Sallard to use a stool would have put customers and other workers at risk, reports Reuters.” However, when Starbucks files its answer to the complaint, hopefully they will outline their argument for direct threat.